China: Aid

Lord Chan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which specific activities they are funding through the Chinese Ministry of Health.

Baroness Amos: We are funding a number of activities implemented in partnership with the Chinese Ministry of Health. We are providing support to the Ministry of Health to implement the Government of China-World Bank Basic Health Services Project. We are helping to develop replicable models of HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment and care for high-risk and vulnerable groups in Yunnan and Sichuan. We are also supporting the development of sustainable and replicable community health systems which improve access for the poor in four cities. We have also made a significant contribution to the Government of China-World Bank TB prevention and control programme.

China: Aid

Lord Chan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will consider diverting funding to China from abortion towards other healthcare needs.

Baroness Amos: The Government do not fund abortions in China and are working to raise the health status of poor people in China through support that improves their access to basic health services that cost less, are of higher quality and target specific public health challenges like TB and HIV/AIDS.
	The Government do not support coercive family planning practices. All UK assistance for health programmes is provided in support of the principles of free and informed choice set out at the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo in 1994 and reaffirmed at the Cairo plus 5 meeting in New York in 1999.

Cayman Islands Attorney-General

Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the Attorney-General of the Cayman Islands has departed.

Baroness Amos: The Attorney-General of the Cayman Islands, Mr David Ballantyne, decided to leave office on 15 March, by mutual agreement with the Cayman Islands Government. Mr Ballantyne had come under criticism in the Cayman Islands following the collapse of the Eurobank money-laundering trial. He took the view that this made it impossible for him to carry out his role there effectively. Press allegations that Mr Ballantyne had prior nowledge of, or had approved, the destruction of evidence which led to the collapse of the Eurobank trial are inaccurate. He acted to ensure the disclosure of all relevant information to the defence in order to secure a fair trial and acted properly in bringing the trial to an end when he concluded that a fair trial could not be ensured. In doing so, he carried out the independent role the Cayman Islands constitution assigns to the Attorney-General. Her Majesty's Government are satisfied that Mr Ballantyne has throughout acted with professional integrity and in the best interests of the administration of justice in the Cayman Islands.
	Press reports suggesting that I agreed, on behalf of Her Majesty's Government, to the dismissal from office of Mr Ballantyne are also incorrect. The independence and security of tenure of the Attorney-General is constitutionally protected in the Cayman Islands.

Prisoners: Resettlement

Lord Dholakia: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the principal steps which the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the Home Office, the Prison Service, the Youth Justice Board, the Department for Work and Pensions, Jobcentre Plus and the Learning Skills Council have each taken over the past year to promote the resettlement of prisoners.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The principal steps taken by Her Majesty's Government over the past year in promoting the resettlement of offenders are as follows: Office of Deputy Prime Minister
	The Homelessness Act 2002 places new duties on local housing authorities to undertake a review of homelessness in their areas and develop a homelessness strategy based on that review by July 2003. This will need to cover all homeless groups, including ex-prisoners.
	In 2002 the Homelessness Directorate funded a number of new pilot schemes with voluntary sector organisations and local authorities to prevent homelessness among released prisoners. It has also funded a scheme to secure hostel bed spaces for remand and short-term prisoners who are vulnerable to sleeping rough on release.
	The Homelessness Directorate has worked with the Department for Work and Pensions to update the B79 (notification of discharge from prison) form and to support guidance used by Jobcentre Plus staff that can help prisoners verify their identification.
	From April, local commissioning bodies, on which local probation services are represented, will develop Supporting People strategies setting out how they will meet the needs of vulnerable people in their areas, including ex-offenders. Home Office National Rehabilitation Strategy
	In July 2002 the Social Exclusion Unit published its report Reducing re-offending by ex-prisoners. The principal recommendation of the report was the development and implementation of a national rehabilitation strategy.
	This work is being taken forward within the Home Office by the Adult Offenders and Rehabilitation Unit. The unit is currently working with a number of government departments towards producing an action plan, responding to the SEU report. Criminal Justice Bill
	The Criminal Justice Bill introduces new sentences, such as custody minus, custody plus and intermittent custody, which have been designed so that they may promote the effective resettlement of offenders. National Probation Service
	A joint project board has been etablished with the Prison Service to oversee the development of the Joint Resettlement Pathfinders and other programmes for short-term prisoners.
	The Probation and Prison Services are also continuing to develop the joint offender assessment system (OASys). This joint working and assessment system will enhance overall case risk and needs management.
	The Probation Service is continuing to build, and to be involved in, resettlement partnerships with a wide range of other relevant statutory and voluntary agencies. HM Prison Service
	The Prison Service has continued to develop its Custody to Work initiative, in partnership with Jobcentre Plus, the National Probation Service, employers, housing providers and the voluntary sector.
	Funding has been provided through SR2000 to expand the delivey of accredited offending behaviour programmes (OBPs) during 2002–03 and beyond and to increase the range of accredited programmes available to prisoners.
	Funding, allocated through SR2000, is being channelled into further development of the Prison Service drug strategy.
	Last year the Prisoners' Learning and Skills Unit broadened basic skills targets for prisons to help establishments meet the range of learning needs among their prisoners.
	A new diagnostic assessment has been trialled to make sure that learning programmes address the needs of individual prisoners.
	A practitioners' guide had been shared with all establishments for teaching people with learning difficulties.
	£4.5 million of capital was made available in 2002–03 for establishments to buy computers for libraries so that they can support learning; purchase computers and software to improve initial assessment in local prisons; upgrade their vocational training provision so that it is more relevant to the labour market; and provide classroom space next to prison workshops so that prisoners can gain a broad range of employability skills.
	£1 million was invested in a partnership initiative with NACRO and the private sector IT company Cisco to provide opportunities for prisoners to gain ICT skills and either to continue learning or gain work on release. Youth Justice Board for England and Wales
	The Youth Justice Board is a key partner in the PRISE initiative, a new national development partnership which has as its aim the re-engineering of the resettlement process for offenders aged 16 to 18, prior to sentence, through custody, back into the community and toward sustainable employment.
	A joint re-engagement target has been agreed with the Connexions service to ensure that 90 per cent of young offenders are in suitable full-time education, training and employment during and at the end of sentence by the end of 2004. Department for Work and Pensions
	Employment and benefit surgeries are at various stages of development in 13 prisons; 11 of these serve the street crime areas in England and one each in Scotland and Wales. This work is in advance of full national roll-out which is scheduled to commence from April 2003.
	Surgeries will continue to build on the work with prisons to increase take-up of Freshstart.
	Progress2work began in 2002, providing co-ordinated specialist employment help for those wishing to move away from drugs misuse and into more stable and productive lives.
	Progress2work linkUP builds on the progress2work model and broadens the approach to a wider customer group, particularly those disadvantaged because of an offending background, whether or not they are drug misusers.
	Jobpoints in prisons is a joint initiative between Jobcentre Plus and the Prison Service, providing access to this information to prisoners in the pre-release phase of their sentence.
	The Ambition Construction initiative has established close links with major employers in the construction sector. Ex-prisoners are eligible to join and to have early access to the selection process. Learning and Skills Council
	During 2002 Entry to Employment (E2E) pathfinder projects commenced in 11 areas, with offenders and ex-offenders forming part of the target group in six of these.
	The Department for Education and Skills (DfES) and the Learning and Skills Council agreed to fund up to 400 category D prisoners in England to enrol in courses on a day-release basis for the academic year 2002–03, widening prisoners' access to learning opportunities, particularly in vocational training.

Corruption Bill

Baroness Massey of Darwen: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the draft Corruption Bill will be published.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I am publishing today a draft Corruption Bill as a command paper (Cm 5777). The Bill will modernise the law and make it more effective, replacing the existing patchwork of overlapping offences—which date from 1889—with a single statute. The Bill's reforms give effect to a Law Commission report of 1998 and to the recommendation of the Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege to enable evidence of proceedings in Parliament to be led in corruption cases. They will also ensure that the UK is up to date in its international obligations and enable it to ratify the Council of Europe Civil Law Convention on Corruption. We recognise that corruption is an intricate and sensitive issue and the Bill will be subject to pre-legislative scrutiny before being introduced to Parliament.
	These reforms are part of the Government's overall anti-corruption strategy. This country is relatively free from corruption, but it remains an insidious threat, to which we need to be constantly alert. We have already made important changes to the law.
	Part 12 of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 extended UK jurisdiction to corruption offences committed abroad by UK nationals and incorporated bodies. Many UK companies have adjusted their policies in the light of this legal change, which is specifically identified in the National Policing Plan 2003–06 as an important issue for forces, though we hope the number of cases will be small.
	Part 3 of the same Act gave wide powers of disclosure to tax authorities and others to assist all criminal investigations and proceedings.
	The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 introduced new provisions to strengthen the framework, both for tackling money laundering and for assisting others to access the UK legal system to detect, freeze and recover funds and assets of illicit origin.
	The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 charged the Financial Services Authority (FSA) with reducing the extent to which financial institutions are used in connection with financial crime. The Act gave the FSA a range of powers, including the power to make rules on money laundering and the ability to prosecute firms for breaches of the Money Laundering Regulations.
	The Police Reform Act 2002 set up a new system for handling complaints against the police, under the guardianship of a new body, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), which will come into existence as a shadow body next month. Under the new system, which will start next year, police forces will be required to refer all serious cases of corruption involving police officers to the IPCC, whether or not a complaint has been made.
	We will continue to ensure that the UK maintains high standards in its domestic law and practice on corruption. The Committee on Standards in Public Life, now chaired by Sir Nigel Wicks, provides independent oversight: its remit is to examine current concerns about standards of conduct of public office holders and to make recommendations "to ensure the highest standards of propriety in public life".
	However, the international dimension is crucial in this inter-connected world, so the Cabinet Office has set up a committee to co-ordinate the work of the departments and agencies most involved. The following action has been taken:
	The UK has strongly supported GRECO (the Council of Europe's anti-corruption body), whose membership incudes all the 10 states which will join the EU next year. GRECO subjects its member states' anti-corruption systems to peer review and its reports have been made public.
	The Home Office, in partnership with the anti-corruption command of the Metropolitan Police, is leading a twinning project in Bulgaria. The project will implement an anti-corruption strategy, involving the development of an integrated system for countering corruption within the Bulgarian Ministry of Interior.
	The UK has continued to participate actively in the peer review process set up by the OECD Bribery Working Group, which addresses the supply side of bribery—that is, bribes paid by businesses to foreign public officials. The UK also is playing a key role in ensuring that preventive measures against corruption are included in the draft UN Convention against Corruption, to address the demand side of bribery—that is, corrupt behaviour by foreign officials.
	The Export Credits Guarantee Department (ECGD) has enhanced its procedures to prevent those engaging in corrupt practices from receiving support. Due-diligence checks are now made on lenders, guarantors and borrowers, as well as exporters and buyers, and information is sought from exporters on the contract award process to assist ECGD in identifying contracts which may potentially give rise to problems.
	ECGD has also given special consideration to its procedures relating to agents' commission. Ultimately, if ECGD is not satisfied with the arrangements for payment of the level of commission in any case, it may decline to provide any support for that case.
	The UK has supported work by the IMF and World Bank, in collaboration with the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), to tackle money laundering and the financing of terrorism, including adding the FATF recommendations to the list of areas assessed by the fund and bank and endorsing a 12-month pilot programme.
	FCO and DFID are jointly supporting the development of the East and Southern Africa Anti-Money Laundering Group, a regional body of the global FATF anti-money laundering system. In partnership with the EU, DFID is also supporting an anti-money laundering programme under the auspices of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) process.
	DFID supports programmes on public expenditure management and good governance throughout the developing world that help to put in place key preventive measures against corruption. DFID also supports anti-corruption commissions in Honduras, Malawi, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Uganda, Zambia and is developing support for the commission in Nigeria.
	In May 2002, DFID and the Home Office organised a seminar on mutual legal assistance for practitioners from 16 key African and Asian countries.
	The Department for International Development (DFID) worked closely with the National Audit Office on how its own internal planning and management systems address corruption risks. DFID will be working to strengthen its own internal systems and improve awareness of corruption risks in the management of its programmes.
	The UK has led the development of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, announced by the Prime Minister at the Durban World Summit in September 2002, which seeks to encourage company and government transparency over payments and revenues arising from the exploitation of natural resources. The initiative aims to reduce the risk of misappropriation of these revenues and increase the likelihood of their contributing towards sustainable growth and poverty reduction.

Immigration Officers: Checking Validityof Passports

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether immigration officers at points of entry into the United Kingdom have the facility to check on-line the validity of British passports presented by persons leaving or arriving; and how long after the reporting in any part of the world of a lost or stolen British passport this information is available to immigration officers at points of entry into the United Kingdom.

Lord Filkin: UK immigration officers operating the primary immigration control at ports of entry do not have direct access on-line to the UK Passport Agency database. However, details of passports reported as lost or stolen to British embassies or high commissions abroad are entered onto the Immigration Service Warnings Index, which is available at all ports of entry.
	As part of its anti-fraud programme, the UK Passport Service is developing a database for passports reported lost, stolen or recovered. This work is taking place in conjunction with a project to provide Foreign and Commonwealth Office posts abroad with access to the main passport index. Once these projects are completed there will be a system in place for the prompt recording of reports of passports lost or stolen anywhere in the world. This system will be available to UK passport issuing offices world-wide and it will also be made available to the Immigration Service.

OGC: Design of Public Buildings

Lord Freyberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many designers are members of the Chief Executive Advisory Group of the Office of Government Commerce; and whether there are any plans to appoint a designer as a member of the executive board of the Office of Government Commerce.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The OGC Chief Executive's Advisory Group (CEAG) provides strategic advice on OGC activities from key departments, executive agencies and NDPBs. Each member organisation is represented by a member of staff best placed to carry out the role, typically their head of procurement. Therefore, while departmental representatives may have qualifications or experience of design, this is not a factor in their appointment to the group.
	The executive board provides strategic and operational direction to OGC. Its members are all OGC executive directors, with the exception of a non-executive director, with a background in human resources. There are no plans to appoint a designer as an additional member.
	OGC promotes the importance of excellent design in terms of functionality, build quality, efficiency and sustainability, respect for context and aesthetic quality in achieving whole-life value for money. For example, OGC collaborated closely with the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) to produce and publish guidance in October 2002 Improving the Standards of Design in Public Buildings, which is available on the OGC website (www.ogc.gov.uk). OGC is now engaged in a programme of work with CABE to support departments in their implementation of the recommendations.

Pensions

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their estimate, in respect of the most recent year for which figures are available, of how many members of defined benefit pension schemes retired with a starting pension of:
	(a) £50,000–£60,000;
	(b) £60,001–£70,000;
	(c) £70,001–£80,000;
	(d) £80,001–£90,000;
	(e) £90,001–£100,000; and
	(f) £100,000.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The information is not available in the format requested. However, available estimates are given in the following table. They are derived from the Survey of Personal Incomes 2000–01 and show the total number of taxpaying individuals in receipt of any kind of private pension in the specified bands. For completeness, those with a private pension of less than £50,000 and the total number have also been included.
	It is not possible to identify separately whether the private pension is derived from membership of a defined benefit or defined contribution scheme, nor to identify individuals retiring in the year.
	
		Number of taxpaying individuals1 in receipt of a private pension in 2000–01
		
			 Private pension amount(2) (lower limit) Number of individuals(thousands) 
			 Less than £50,000 5,340 
			 £50,000 8 
			 £60,000 5 
			 £70,000 3 
			 £80,000 2 
			 £90,000 1 
			 £100,000 or more 4 
			 Total 5,370 
		
	
	(1) Total individuals in receipt of a private pension is estimated at around 7- million (Family Resources Survey 2000–01).
	(2) The pension in payment recorded is net of any tax-free lump sum drawn from the fund in the year of retirement.
	However, maximum tax-approved pensions available to people under the 1989 occupational tax regime are limited to two-thirds of the earnings cap, currently £97,200—ie £64,800. This covers around two-thirds of all occupational pension scheme members and potentially covers the remaining third if they change employment. Current estimates suggest that about 10 per cent of the pre-1989 group move out of this group each year. Therefore the number shown with pensions over £70,000 may not be a good indicator for future levels of tax-approved pension income.

Pensions

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will estimate, under the present taxation arrangements and annuity rates, for:
	(a) a woman aged 60,
	(b) a woman aged 65,
	(c) a man aged 60, and
	(d) a man aged 65, what starting pension could be purchased today with a capital lump sum of £1.4 million, less the maximum permissible lump sum allowed to be drawn tax-free on retirement today, working on the assumption that the starting pension can provide for a surviving spouse pension to be payable at half the rate of the person retiring today and with both pensions uprated annually in line with the retail prices index; and what annuity rates have been used in making these estimates.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The following table shows for a number of age groups the income derived from a fund of £1.4 million built up in a personal pension. The table shows what income could be derived from both a joint life level annuity escalating annually with the retail prices index and with a 50 per cent survivor's pension; and additionally the income from a single life level annuity—the most common form of annuity purchased. These are based on annuity rates quoted by the Annuity Bureau in March 2003 and all assume that the maximum lump sum of £350,000 has already been drawn from the fund.
	
		Income and annuity rates for a £1.4 million fund built up in a personal pension scheme
		
			   Joint life escalating* Single life level 
			 Purchaser Spouse Initial annual income (£) Annuity rate (%) Initial annual income (£) Annuity rate (%) 
			 Female, 60 60 65 40,341 41,444 3.8 3.9 61,740 5.9 
			 Female, 65 65 70 47,576 49,098 4.5 4.7 70,350 6.7 
			 Male, 60 55 60 40,278 42,378 3.8 4.0 67,200 6.4 
			 Male, 65 60 65 47,513 50,537 4.5 4.8 77,490 7.4 
		
	
	* Note that as the expected value of the income stream to be paid out by the annuity provider depends on the life expectancy of joint lives; the annuity rate depends upon their age differential. If the joint lives are of the same age and the man purchases, the annuity rate is higher than if the woman bought the annuity. This is because he is not expected to live as long as a woman purchaser and therefore a full annuity income is expected to be paid out for a shorter period than if the woman had purchased. Annuity rates are rounded to one decimal place.
	However, the maximum tax-approved pension available to those who have joined their scheme since 1989, approximately two-thirds of all occupational scheme members, is two-thirds of the earnings cap, currently £97,200. The maximum benefits under the 1989 tax regime for occupational pensions are also dependent on annuity rates. So, for example, a man retiring at a scheme's normal retirement age of 65, on a salary of at least £97,200 and sufficient service to give a pension of two-thirds of capped final remuneration, could have a pension of no more than £64,800 if no lump sum were taken. If the maximum lump sum of £145,800 is taken, his actual pension income would then be reduced to £58,239, assuming an annuity rate of 4.5 per cent is used to calculate the necessary reduction to the pension in respect of the lump sum.

Indices of Deprivation

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will inform the House of the progress being made to update the Indices of Deprivation 2000.

Lord Rooker: I wish to inform the House that we will not be able to publish the updated Indices of Deprivation on the original timescale of July this year.
	The Indices of Deprivation 2000 (ID 2000) combine statistical indicators on economic, social and housing issues into a single score for each ward in England. This enables all wards to be ranked relative to one another according to their level of deprivation. The indices are used by government and other agencies to identify areas where there are concentrations of deprived people. They are, for example, used in the allocation of substantial resources aimed at renewing deprived neighbourhoods. For all these reasons it is therefore important for the indices to remain a robust way of identifying the most deprived areas. They were last revised in 2000; more recent and detailed data have now become available and last year we began consulting across and outside government for views on how best to strengthen and update the ID 2000.
	The two-stage consultation period began in November 2002 and was due to be completed by the spring to allow publication in July 2003. We received over 200 responses to the recently concluded consultation on the stage one report, with many useful suggestions, including confirmation of the need for data on crime to form part of the revised indices.
	The timing has been affected by the lack of crime data to form this crime domain. The required data are unlikely to be available until later this year. Additional research is also needed on how to move away from using wards as the basic geography of the indices, to one based on geographic units that are more consistent over time and in terms of size. This will allow us to identify areas where very small pockets of deprivation exist and to track change over time. There is more work to do on other aspects such as take-up of means-tested benefits and affordability of housing.
	To investigate these issues in full will involve additional research and analysis so we have decided to delay the second stage of the consultation. We hope to complete this during the autumn with a view to publishing the revised Indices of Deprivation in the winter.

Unitary Structures of Local Government

Lord Acton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they propose to consult on the cost model they are developing to assist the Boundary Committee for England to assess the relative cost differential of different patterns of unitary government in the regions.

Lord Rooker: In December, the Government published for consultation a draft of the guidance that we intend to give the Boundary Committee for England in the event that we direct it to carry out local government reviews in any of the English regions.
	The draft guidance indicated that for the purpose of assessing the relative cost differential of different unitary structures of local government, we would develop a cost model which would be made available to the boundary committee and others should they choose to use it. We said that we would consult on any model before it was finalised. Accordingly, I have today sent a paper with details of the work undertaken for us by PricewaterhouseCoopers to the Local Government Association (LGA), the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accounting (CIPFA) and the Boundary Committee for England. This sets out proposals for a model which we will be discussing with those bodies.
	I am placing copies of the paper in the Libraries of the House.

US Customs: Airline Passenger Information

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, as reported in the Guardian newspaper on 20 February, the European Commission has made an agreement with the United States Government, binding on all British airlines with effect from 5 March, whereby personal information about all passengers flying to the United States will be disclosed to the United States customs, immigration and other agencies; if so, whether (a) the terms of the agreement contain safeguards matching European data protection laws; and (b) the agreement has been approved by Her Majesty's Government or by the Council of Ministers.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: On 17 and 18 February senior officials of the European Commission and the United States administration met to discuss the problems for airlines operating flights to or from the US arising from the requirements imposed by US legislation for airlines to disclose detailed information about passengers to US Customs.
	Following the discussions the two sides issued a joint statement explaining the outcome. They agreed to work towards a bilateral arrangement which will permit the Commission to make a formal decision under Article 25.6 of the EC Data Protection Directive that there is adequate protection for the passenger information that US Customs receives from airlines which are bound by EC law. Such a decision will be based on information and undertakings provided by US Customs.
	The joint statement sets out the undertakings that US Customs has already made to protect the passenger information that it receives from airlines in the interim. They include an undertaking to respect the principles of the Data Protection Directive. The requirement for airlines to provide passenger information to US Customs is effective from 5 March.
	The joint statement is not binding on airlines. It is for airlines to decide whether they disclose passenger information as required by US law. Airlines not providing the information will be liable to heavy fines and other sanctions from the US side. The content of the joint statement is a matter for the two parties in whose name it was made. It requires no formal endorsement by either Her Majesty's Government or the Council of Ministers. The Government are considering the implications of the joint statement for UK law.
	I am placing the joint statement in the Library.

Ram Doctrine

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 25 February (WA 12-13), whether the courts have recognised the legitimacy of the principles stated in the second paragraph of the Answer; and, if so, whether they will identify the reported cases in respect of each principle; and
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 25 February (WA 12-13), whether the reference to "human rights law" includes the obligations imposed upon the United Kingdom by international treaties other than the European Convention on Human Rights, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights and the International Labour Organisation Conventions; and, if not, why not; and
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 25 February (WA 12-13), what criteria are used, in cases not involving the need to comply with human rights law, to decide whether there is legal need for legislation to authorise an extension of Ministers' powers; and
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 25 February (WA 12-13), whether they consider that the common law principles of legality and legal certainty extend beyond circumstances where proposed action might substantially interfere with human rights; and if so, what are those circumstances; and
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 25 February (WA 12-13), what were the instances during the past five years in which they decided that legislation was undesirable to authorise an extension of Ministers' powers; and
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 25 February (WA 12-13), which powers of Ministers have been extended without legislative authority during the past five years.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Ministers can act only within the law. It follows that an extension of ministerial power will always require legislation (or, conceivably, a change in the common law). Legislation will also be necessary where what is proposed requires not only the exercise of powers but also, for example, the imposition of legal obligations, the creation of offences, or the raising of taxes.
	If, however, it is proposed that Ministers exercise powers that are already available at common law to private individuals, or to the Crown by virtue of the prerogative, there is no legal requirement for legislation.
	The case for putting existing powers onto a statutory footing will therefore depend not on strict law but on the matters of convention, good governance and practicality discussed in the previous Answer. These include the considerations of propriety addressed by the Public Accounts Committee Concordat mentioned in that Answer. They include also the principles of legal certainty, accessibility and clarity, which the Government regard as important in their own right, quite apart from human rights considerations.
	In considering the possibility of legislation, the Governnment indeed have in mind all their international treaty obligations. As well as the European Convention on Human Rights, these include the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights and the International Labour Organisation Conventions.
	2 AC 513. The Ram doctrine is being considered by the Court of Appeal in a current case, R (Hooper) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.

Army Manpower Requirement

Lord Vivian: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their response to the report, published by the Defence Analytical Services Agency in June 2002, on the Army's future manpower requirement.

Lord Bach: The Defence Analytical Services Agency monthly statistical Tri-Service Publication 3 includes Armed Forces full-time strength and requirement figures. Copies are placed in the Library of the House. The June 2002 edition included a revised Army manpower requirement figure. This figure is reviewed annually in the light of evolving doctrine, new technology and equipment and possible changes to the operating environment.

Iraq: War Correspondents

Lord Vivian: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to accommodate press teams and television networks in any forthcoming conflict in the Gulf.

Lord Bach: The Ministry of Defence has compiled a media pool of accredited United Kingdom war correspondents to accompany our forces. Some 130 such correspondents are presently embedded with all three services, aboard ships, with frontline fighting regiments and at RAF bases in the region. In addition, there is an intention to take parties of journalists from all disciplines, but with a more international mix, on short escorted visits periodically to our Armed Forces in the Gulf.

Brazil: Poultry Meat Imports to UK

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much poultry meat has been imported from Brazil in each of the last four years (a) in tonnage; and (b) in value.

Lord Whitty: 2002 is the latest year for which figures are available on the imports of poultry meat from Brazil. The figures are as follows: UK imports of poultry meat from Brazil 1999–2002
	
		
			 Product Year (tonnes) £'000 
			 Poultry meat 1999 22,272 36,017 
			  2000 27,460 44,094 
			  2001 31,381 55,814 
			  2002 31,660 43,638 
			 Poultry meat total  112,773 179,563 
		
	
	Crown Copyright.
	Source: HM Customs and Excise
	Data prepared by Statistics (Commodities & Food) Accounts and Trade, ESD, Defra.
	2002 data is provisional and subject to amendment.

Brazil: UK Exports

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the value of exports to Brazil in each of the last four years of (a) luxury goods; and (b) all others.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: According to information published by HM Customs and Excise, the value of UK exports of goods to Brazil in each of the past four years were as follows:
	
		
			
			  1999 £745 million 
			  2000 £775 million 
			  2001 £814 million 
			  2002 £888 million. 
		
	
	It is not possible to separately identify luxury goods.

ESPHCA Council, 6 March

Lord Acton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What the outcome was of the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council held on 6 March in Brussels.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Malcolm Wicks) represented the UK at the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs (ESPHCA) Council in Brussels on 6 March 2003, together with the Minister for Employment Relations and the Regions, my honourable friend the Member for Hull West and Hessle, Alan Johnson.
	The main business of this Council was a discussion on the proposed directive on working conditions for temporary workers and the preparation of the spring European Council, to take place on 21 March.
	On the former, following lunchtime discussion, the Presidency concluded that the dossier was not ready for agreement at this point. The UK declared its readiness to reach agreement on a directive, but one with considerably more flexibility than the current draft, and joined the consensus for aiming for political agreement in June.
	On the latter, the Council adopted without amendment the Joint Employment Report 2002 and its contribution to the spring Council, Key messages on the future of the Employment Strategy. In a public debate member states were in broad agreement on the priorities for the revised employment guidelines outlined in the paper: the guidelines should be fewer in number, focused on outputs rather than inputs and linked closely to the Lisbon employment rate targets.
	The debate also revealed broad support for the idea of an employment task force, as proposed by the UK, France and Germany. The Council agreed that the task force should be a one-off, independent analysis of the measures required to improve Europe's employment performance in the short term. The task force should complement the revised employment strategy, without creating any new processes.
	Council approved joint reports from the Commission and the Council on adequate and sustainable pensions and on the future of healthcare and care for the elderly. It noted the opinion of the Social Protection Committee on the Commission's synthesis report and agreed a key issues paper on social protection to be sent to the spring Council.
	The Commission reassured the Council that its forthcoming communication on streamlining of social protection would acknowledge that different methods and time-scales were appropriate for different areas of work. It would also respect subsidiarity.
	The Council noted the work programmes for 2003 of the Employment Committee and the Social Protection Committee.
	The Council adopted a decision establishing a tripartite social summit for growth and employment, noting the declaration from Denmark and the UK that the agreement was on the understanding that it did not set a precedent for the use of Article 202 as a treaty base for such decisions.
	The Council heard without comment presentations by the Commission on initiatives following the Commission action plan for skills and mobility: European health insurance card, legal basis of the European Employment Services (EURES) and free movement of workers.
	Following an orientation debate, the Council agreed on a joint Presidency and Commission proposal for the Council to send an annual report on gender mainstreaming to the spring Council. The Commission agreed with the UK that this would not involve the establishment of a new process.
	The Commission reported on progress under the European Year of People with Disabilities and outlined its forthcoming report on the social situation in Europe focusing on health.
	No consumer affairs items were on the agenda.
	No votes were taken at this Council.

University Admissions

Lord Pilkington of Oxenford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On what criteria they expect universities to give preference to applicants from disadvantaged backgrounds; and how the information on the basis of which these criteria apply is to be ascertained.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: Universities are responsible for their own admissions policies. They should select applicants by merit, based on their potential to succeed. We encourage universities to use a wide range of measures to assess that potential.

Calthorpe Clinic, Edgbaston

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When was the Calthorpe Clinic in Edgbaston, Birmingham, last subject to inspection by the National Care Standards Commission; what was the result of this inspection; and whether recommendations made in the inspection report from the commission have been acted upon.

Baroness Andrews: The Calthorpe Clinic was inspected in November 2002 and the inspection report is not yet in the public domain. The clinic is currently finalising an action plan covering the requirements and recommendations that were identified in the National Care Standards Commission's draft report. The inspection report will then be completed and made public.

Food Supplements

Lord Clement-Jones: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What recent representations they have received from individual companies, trade organisations or consumer bodies about nutrients which are currently permitted for use in food supplements in the United Kingdom but which are omitted from the list of permitted nutrients set out in Annexes 1 and 2 of the Food Supplements Directive.

Baroness Andrews: A number of individual companies, trade organisations and lobby groups have recently suggested that the Government should seek an amendment to the Food Supplements Directive to allow the continued sale in the United Kingdom of safe and appropriately labelled food supplements even if they lie outside the technical restrictions of the directive.
	During negotiations the Government fought hard to secure the provisions in Article 4 of the directive, which enable member states to allow the continued sale of products that do not comply with the compositional requirements up to 31 December 2009 provided certain criteria are met. The Government are taking advantage of these provisions and have no plans to seek a further amendment to the directive. Negotiations were finished some time ago and it is not likely either that the Commission would be willing to reopen them now or that there would be support from a majority of other member states for such an amendment.

Works of Art: Government Indemnity Scheme

Lord Beaumont of Whitley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Blackstone on 6 December 2001 (WA 158), what steps they have now taken to amend the government indemnity scheme on works of art.

Baroness Blackstone: No decision has yet been taken to amend the government indemnity scheme. The review mentioned in my last Answer has yet to be completed. I am not aware of any loans that have fallen due to the current arrangements for indemnifying items previously accepted in lieu of tax.

Northern Ireland: LMC Levy

Lord Skelmersdale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the maximum levy on sheep and bovine animals slaughtered in (or sent out of) Northern Ireland as permitted under the Livestock Marketing Commission Act (Northern Ireland) 1967 was not increased in either the 1980s or 1990s, so resulting in the large percentage increase in the Livestock and Meat Commission (Maximum Levy) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2003 (SR 2003/20).

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The actual rates of levy payable to the Livestock and Meat Commission for Northern Ireland (LMC) were last revised in October 1988 when they rose from 45p to 80p per bovine (ie cattle) and from 4p to 8p per ovine (ie sheep). These amounts fell within the ceilings of £1 per bovine and 10p per sheep detailed in the Livestock Marketing Commission (Maximum Levy) Regulations (NI) 1976 (SR 184).
	In the late 1980s and early 1990s, finance surpluses were built up in the LMC from both levy income and the activities the commission carried out on behalf of the then Intervention Board (now Rural Payments Agency). This revenue was used to avoid the need for levy increases and to fund additional LMC activities necessary, post the 1996 BSE crisis, to support and communicate with consumers in Northern Ireland and Great Britain, given the critical need to expand beef sales in those marketplaces. However, it was considered that these surpluses would become exhausted by the end of March 2002 and consequently an increase in levy income was necessary in order for the LMC to maintain its activities at anything approaching existing levels.
	Formal consultation with the industry was completed in March 2002, with general acceptance of proposals to increase the existing producer levies for cattle and sheep and to make statutory the voluntary processor slaughter levies for cattle and sheep. New legislation to give effect to these proposals came into operation at the end of February this year.
	The Livestock and Meat Commission (Maximum Levy) Regulations (NI) 2003 (SR No. 20), which came into operation on 27 February 2003, set new ceiling amounts for each levy rate (ie £6 per bovine and £1 per ovine) which are well above the new combined actual rates of levy payable detailed within the Livestock and Meat Commission (Levy) (No. 2) Regulations (NI) 2003 (SR No. 104), which came into operation on 28 February 2003, ie £2 per bovine (£1 from producer and £1 from processor) and 30p per ovine (20p from producer and 10p from processor). The LMC had, however, also initially sought to introduce a transaction levy, to be payable on every animal movement, in order to spread the payment of levy across the industry rather than just on the finishers. The ceiling amounts in the maximum levy regulations were set sufficiently high to collect transaction levy and also to ensure that any future increases could be introduced with the minimum of legislative change. It should be noted, however, that the proposal for a transaction levy has not yet been progressed as lawyers considered that the powers within the primary legislation, the Livestock Marketing Commission Act (NI) 1967, as amended, were not sufficient to enable the introduction of such a levy. The proposal for a transaction levy is being considered further by the department.

Intelligence Services Commissioner

Lord Peston: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Intelligence Services Commissioner will be reappointed under Section 59(1) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: In accordance with Section 59(1) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, after consultation with the Foreign, Home and Defence Secretaries, the Prime Minister has decided to re-appoint Lord Justice Simon Brown as the Intelligence Services Commissioner from 1 April 2003 to 31 March 2006.
	The Prime Minister is delighted that Lord Justice Simon Brown has agreed to continue to serve as the Intelligence Services Commissioner.